Abstract
In this paper, the famous battle between Robert E. Peary and Frederick Cook is detailed. Both explorers claimed to be the first to reach the North Pole. The author argues that this acrimonious battle developed and continues to persist almost 100 years later because of the personalities of the men themselves. Also cited are public doubts about each of their achievements , the politics of the time and the mystique of the North Pole. The author also includes material that may disprove the actual achievements of both men, and how the controversy attracted the public to take sides. The paper concludes by stating that the story demonstrates the depths of mankind's obsession with reaching nature's limits and conquering the North Pole.

From the Paper
"Out of such an experience, one might expect an uncommon bond of friendship to develop. Instead, Peary and Cook spent their later years as bitter enemies embroiled in one of the major controversies of the early part of the 20th century - both of the men claimed to be the first to reach the North Pole; Peary in 1909 and Cook in 1908. Both camps initiated a war to discredit the other side and the men took the fight to the grave and, in a manner, beyond it. Both sides continue to use the Internet, books and articles to wage a nasty war of allegations, accusing each other of everything from racism to outright fraud."

Tags:Robert, E., Peary, Frederick, Cook, North, Pole, explorers

Abstract
This paper provides an overview of the Battle of Gettysburg in general, followed by an assessment of how the roles played by the 26th North Carolina and the Iron Brigade during the first two days of battle helped to influence the outcome. A summary of the research and salient findings are presented. The author focuses on the role of leadership on both sides, as they appeared to play a critical role in the outcome of this infamous battle. The author also cites that it is clear from the research that the men of the 26th North Carolina and the Iron Brigade ardently believed in what they were fighting for, and were willing to die for their causes.

Outline:
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Figure 1. Uniform of the Iron Brigade
26th North Carolina
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Given its importance, it is not surprising that Gettysburg is the most studied battle in the history of America. In fact, Martin points out that, "Even before the fighting was over it was viewed as the most decisive battle of the Civil War, and a legion of writers have since recorded their narratives and offered their interpretations of the battle." Likewise, Andrews suggests that, "No battle of the Civil War appeals more to the popular imagination than the one which was fought near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, July 1, 2, and 3, 1863. Apart from the fact that this struggle, unlike most, is comparatively easy for the layman to understand; apart from the fact that it was one of the bloodiest battles in modern times -- the Battle of Gettysburg stands forth as a turning point in the history of the Civil War." The Battle of Gettysburg was fought during July 1-3, 1863, just 35 miles southwest of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Losses on both sides, though, were among the war's heaviest; of 88,000 Northern troops, casualties were approximately 23,000; from a total 75,000 Southerners, there were likewise more than 20,000. Two of the units that participated in the battles at Gettysburg that took place over the course of the next 3 days were the famed Iron Brigade of the Union and the equally tough 26th North Carolina of the Confederates, both of which received an inordinate number of casualties during the fighting that ensued. These units and their respective parts in the Battle of Gettysburg are discussed further below."

Tags:Civil, War, Gettysburg, Conferderacy, Union, 26th, North, Carolina, Iron, Brigade

Abstract
This paper provides an insight into the Battle at Antietam in 1862 which cost more that 23,000 Union and Confederate lives, known as the "Bloodiest Day" in U.S. combat history. It recounts the events leading up to the battle, the main events during the battle and the impact and significance of the battle upon the Civil War. It analyzes the aftermath of the battle including the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed the slaves and further polarized the division between the North and the South.

From the Paper
"Several states (Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Kentucky and Maryland) remained as "border" states not pledging their allegiance to either side. The tactical importance of these states was immeasurable to the South; if control could be gained they would act as a stepping stone to the invasion of the North. With the Union still reeling from their defeats at Bull Run, the possibility of victory for the South became a reality therefore setting the stage for the battle at Antietam."

Tags:north, south, confederates, emancipation, proclamation, civil, war, lee

Abstract
The paper recounts the story the Battle of Gettysberg, one of the most horrific battles to occur during the Civil War. It provides a concise account of the days leading up to and a detailed description of the events of actual battle in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania taken from factual accounts and historical documentation. It discusses the leadership and tactics of both sides and looks at the events from the perspectives of both the North and South .

From the Paper
"General Stewart's troops were well behind him and would be unable to join the fight this day. It took several hours for General Lee's three corps to get into position, in which he had laid out, to ready for an attack. General Meade had been up all night inspecting and arranging his lines. By early the second day, most of the army of the Potomac was in place, in the shape of a rough horseshoe pointing towards Gettysburg and open to the south. General Jeb Stewart, riding far ahead of his men, had arrived after noon, and Lee was quite furious with him. General Lee demanded to know why Stewart had not kept in contact with him."

Tags:civil, war, lee, north, south

Abstract
This paper discusses the central idea of "Battle Cry of Freedom" that both the North and the South felt that they were each fighting for freedom. The South held fast to the notion of states' rights. For the Confederate apologist, true freedom included autonomy, self-government, and self-determination. Confederates were opposed to any imposition placed on them by the increasingly industrial North and the federal government that restricted their rights and freedoms as plantation owners.

From the Paper
"McPherson reminds his readers that more Americans lost their lives during the War of Secession than "in all of the country's other wars combined," (viii). The scope and magnitude of the Civil War has not been underestimated by historians, but the intricate set of circumstances that led up to the first shot fired at Fort Sumter remain confounded and complicated. McPherson traces the origins of the conflict to the Mexican War in the mid-nineteenth century. Here, McPherson finds in the Mexican War the beginnings of a rift in the political landscape of America. Not only were new territories gained during this period, but new mindsets were formed and established. Manifest Destiny was for all Americans, but McPherson finds that the particular vision of the manifestation of that destiny differed depending on which side of the Mason-Dixon Line one lived. McPherson's treatment of this early rift in American consciousness is brief but poignant, as the author leads his readers straight into the meat of the matter by Chapter One."

Tags:confederate, north, south, manifest, dynasty

Abstract
This paper provides a detailed, historical account of the battle of Bristoe Station. The leaders on both sides of the war, their tactical and strategic errors in battle, the backgrounds of many of the key players in the war, are all covered in this paper. Furthermore, the paper looks at economic factors affecting the war and the strategic consequences of the outcome of the war. The paper concludes with an assessment of the errors committed by General Lee at the battle and what can be about battle from his errors.

From the Paper
"The Battle of Bristoe Station led many to question the Confederacy's grasp of tactics as it was a strategic blunder. In many respects, it confirmed assumptions made after the battle of Gettysburg that the leadership of the Army of Northern Virginia's officer corps was not infallible. It is the principle battle of the Bristoe campaign, one in which General Lee attempted to separate the Army of the Potomac from its supply lines and prevent the North from sending more troops to Georgia to make inroads into the Confederate interior. On October 14, A.P. Hill's corps stumbled on two Corps of the retreating Union army at Bristoe Station and attacked without proper reconnaissance. In fact, his opponents were Union soldiers of the II Corps, that lay to his right. Believing re-enforcement troops to be close at hand, Hill ordered Henry Heth's division to attempt to breach General Warren's well-fortified line behind the Orange & Alexandria Railroad embankment."

Tags:north, carolina, casualties, corpses, retreat, federals, vicksburg, meade, west, point, jackson

Abstract
The American Civil War was a conflict between the Northern and Southern sections of the United States, but it was, according to the author of the paper, a conflict between the romantic and the modern. The writer contends that both sides entered the war with romantic ideas of how war ought to be fought and slowly became disabused of these ideas by the terrible reality of slaughter on the Civil War battlefield. The writer continues and states that once the reality of war was understood, the North enjoyed two distinct advantages: It possessed a corps of leaders who were able to adapt to the new conditions of warfare and superior material and industrial resources, which are ultimately what determine victory in modern war. In the paper, the author examines these factors and how, in his opinion, they contributed to the North's victory.

From the Paper
"Civilians then, are the true object of war: "the humane thing is to overcome them by means of hunger and nakedness. The earlier we can do so, the less effusion of blood." Bierce acknowledge that the Union had gone through a learning process. "I speak of the latter part of the conflict, when we had learned how to conduct military operations. As long as our main purpose was bloodshed we made little progress." Northern victory in the Civil War was inevitable because in modern warfare the means of production translate directly into military power. In this regard, the South was extraordinarily weak compared to the North. But the Union victory was only achieved when Northern commanders realized the true nature of the war and prosecuted it accordingly. By the end of the war, Northern industry was turning out unlimited quantities of repeating rifles, breech-loading artillery, and iron clad warships. The South had lost even its never very great capacity to make muskets. This disparity was at one and the same time the cause and effect of the Northern victory."

Tags:lincoln, honor, war, gettysburg, battle, napoleon, rifles, duel, americans, french, confererate, military, industry, adaptation, officers, history

Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.

Tags:AMERICAN STUDIES AND HISTORY / MILITARY, battle antietam impact

Abstract
This paper addresses the Battle of Antietam in terms of its significance as a military victory, and how this battle helped to change the conduct of war during its era. This paper demonstrates that the fighting tactics used by the Union Army at the Battle of Antietam helped prove that a small, maneuverable fighting force could win over superior firepower, demonstrating that a lack of strategy could not be compensated through weaponry. Through doing so, it can be seen how the Battle of Antietam helped redefine war protocol to a significant degree.

Tags:AMERICAN STUDIES AND HISTORY / MILITARY, battle of antietam

Abstract
This paper is an examination of the third battle of the Aisne. It details this excellent demonstration of the strengths of the German army during World War I as well as demonstrates why these particular strengths were not sufficient to win the war. It describes this German offensive that began on May 27, 1918. The author believes that the German success in this battle came about as the result of the finely honed German infantry tactics combined with a furiously concentrated artillery bombardment, operating under a sky dominated by the 'Jagdgeschwader' of the VII German army. But he feels that in the end, this battle did not help the Germans win the war in any way, in fact, it actually backfired at them.

From the Paper
"The Third Battle of the Aisne is most certainly not one of the best known battles of World War I. Perhaps this is merely because of that oldest of all war adages, which is that the victors get to write the histories, and that in the aftermath of the war late German victories were brushed aside. Perhaps it is not that often cited simply because, while every battle in a war is important, this one was not a turning point. And yet the battle does deserve to be examined as an excellent demonstration of the strengths of the German army during the Great War as well as a demonstration of why, in the end, these particular strengths would not be sufficient to win the war."

Tags:Great, War, World, I, Aisne, River, Battle, Germans, French, Belgian, Canadian, American, Allies